(32) Arts.

1327 – 1344: Vices of Consent

--
--
CODAL:

Art. 1327: The following cannot give consent to a contract:

(1) Unemancipated minors;
(2) Insane or demented persons, and deaf-mutes who do not know how to write.

Art. 1328: Contracts entered into during a lucid interval are valid. Contracts agreed to
in a state of drunkenness or during a hypnotic spell are voidable.

Art. 1329: The incapacity declared in Article 1327 is subject to the modifications
determined by law, and is understood to be without prejudice to special disqualifications
established in the laws.

Art. 1330: A contract where consent is given through mistake, violence, intimidation,
undue influence or fraud is voidable.

Art. 1331: In order that mistake may invalidate consent, it should refer to the it should
refer to the substance of the thing which is the object of the contract, or to those
conditions which have principally moved one or both parties to enter into the contract.

Mistake as to the identity or qualifications of one of the parties will vitiate consent only
when such identity or qualifications have been the principal cause of the contract.

A simple mistake of account shall give rise to its correction.

Art. 1332: When one of the parties is unable to read, or if the contract is in a language
not understood by him, and mistake or fraud is alleged, the person enforcing the
contract must show that the terms thereof have been fully explained to the former.

Art. 1333: There is no mistake if the party alleging it knew the doubt, contingency or
risk affecting the object of the contract.
--
Art. 1334: Mutual error as to the legal effect of an agreement when the real purpose of
the parties is frustrated, may vitiate consent. NO LEGAL CAPACITY TO GIVE CONSENT
1. Minor
Art. 1335: There is violence when in order to wrest consent, serious or irresistible force 2. Insane or demented person
is employed. 3. Deaf-mute who cannot write
4. Persons with impaired mental facilities or legal capacity (influence of
There is intimidation when one of the contracting parties is compelled by a reasonable drugs/intoxicated)
and well-grounded fear of an imminent and grave evil upon his person or property, or 5. Under hypnotic spell
upon the person or property of his spouse, descendants or ascendants, to give his 6. Those suffering from special disqualifications
consent.
SPECIAL DISQUALIFICATIONS
To determine the degree of the intimidation, the age, sex and condition of the person a) Guardianship
shall be borne in mind. b) Civil Interdiction
c) Conjugal Property
A threat to enforce one’s claim through competent authority, if the claim is just or legal, d) Entities under receivership
does not vitiate consent. e) Hospitalized lepers

Art. 1336: Violence or intimidation shall annul the obligation, although it may have been
employed by a third person who did not take part in the contract.
 f) Prodigals The contract here is voidable but it depends on the tolerance level of that person. He
g) Deaf and dumb who are unable to write or she may be drunk but if he/she can still comprehend and understand the conditions
h) Those of unsound mind even though they have lucid intervals of the contract, then you have a valid contract. It’s a case-to-case basis.
i) Those who by reason of age, disease, weak mind, and other similar causes,
cannot without outside aid, take care of themselves and manage their 5. UNDER A HYPNOTIC SPELL
property, becoming thereby an easy prey for deceit and exploitation
A person under a hypnotic spell may be asked to sign a contract.
GENERAL RULE: Contracts entered into by these persons are valid but voidable.
6. PERSONS SPECIALLY DISQUALIFIED BY LAW TO ENTER INTO A
ILLUSTRATION A CONTRACT
For a minor to enter into a completely valid contract, such as when a minor has a
property under his name, he would need a legal representative. See above example.

If it just a matter of administration (leasing), the legal representative or guardian can do --

it.
REQUIREMENTS OF CONSENT
But if the transaction involves disposition (selling), you have to get court approval. The
parents or the legal representative cannot sign for the minor.
1. MINOR
The contract is valid to the extent that it benefits the minor. A minor can validly enter
into a contract completely through a legal representative or a guardian with the
appropriate authority. There is a need to get court approval in properties or when the
law allows a minor to enter into a contract.
1. Informed
o It is informed when you take out the vices of mistake and fraud.
These assume lack of information. If the contracting parties are
informed of all terms and conditions of a contract, then there can be
no mistake or fraud.
2. Free or Voluntary
o Take out the vices of violence, intimidation and undue influence. This
is a judicial question; the courts will decide. Whoever claims such
vice of consent has the burden of proving it in court.

Example: when you open a kiddie savings account. When you are 7 and over, you can TWO KINDS OF NOTARIZATIONS
open an account validly by law. What is discussed here is a minor purchasing goods a) Jurat – affirmation under oath that the statements contained in the affidavit or
judiciously and to that minor benefits. some document are correct
b) Acknowledgment – an affirmation or an acknowledgement by the contracting
If you want to have a completely valid contract with a minor, you need to get a court parties that they voluntarily and willingly executed the contract or document
approval or representation by an authorized guardian or agents, or find a law
authorizing the contract. BURDEN OF PROOF
 Whoever alleges vice of consent has the burden of proof
2. INSANITY  Exception: If the other party alleges fraud or mistake and that party is illiterate
or does not understand the language of the contract, then there will be a shift
The contract here is voidable. If you want to enter into a contract with an insane person, on the burden of proof.
you contract with the authorized legal representatives, whether with court approval or
otherwise depending on the transaction. Or you can enter in to the contract during the VICES OF CONSENT
lucid interval of the insane person. Patients with mental problems, who will now decide 1. Mistake
whether he or she should be committed? Go to the Court always if there is doubt. 2. Violence
3. Intimidation
3. DEAF-MUTE WHO CANNOT WRITE 4. Fraud
5. Undue influence
The law says deaf-mute who cannot write. Maybe he cannot write but he can
communicate. The assumption of the law is that if that deaf-mute cannot write, then he These vices must refer to consent. If the mistake affects not the consent, but some
has no legal capacity. other part of the contract, then the contract will not be voidable. The vice should vitiate
the consent.
4. PERSON WITH IMPAIRED MENTAL FACULTIES OR LEGAL CAPACITY
MISTAKE
It is a false belief about something. It is an error or wrong appreciation of an element of 1. Substantial error
the contract, specifically the cause or the object. A material mistake, which principally 2. Error regarding the object of the contract
moved the parties to enter into the contract, is considered. 3. Error regarding the conditions that principally induced the party to enter into
the contract
REQUISITES FOR MISTAKE TO VITIATE CONSENT 4. Error in quality
1. The error must be substantial regarding: 5. Error in quantity
a) The object 6. Error in identity or in qualification
b) The conditions which principally moved or induced one of the parties
c) Identity or qualifications, but only if such was the principal cause of the VIOLENCE
contract This refers to physical coercion. The use of physical force and it should be cause of
2. The error must be excusable consent.
3. The error must be a mistake of fact, and not of law.
REQUISITES FOR VIOLENCE TO VITIATE CONSENT
Alternate Requisites (FFHooray) a) Employment of serious or irresistible
1. Mistake must be either with regard to the identity or with regard to the b) It must have been the reason why the contract was entered into
qualification of one of the contracting parties
2. The identity or qualification must have been the principal consideration for the
celebration of the contract. INTIMIDATION
Can be psychological, moral or physical that results to vitiated consent.
If it is related to object or the cause, there is a vice of consent. Under the law, certain
mistakes cannot constitute a vice of consent, such as a mistake in valuation. This will REQUISITES FOR INTIMIDATION TO VITIATE CONSENT
not be mistake because it is all in the mind. a) Reasonable and well-grounded fear
b) Of an imminent and grave evil
Mistake of law can also result to vitiated consent if: c) Upon his person, property, or upon the person or property of his spouse,
a) Mutual error with respect to legal effect of the contract descendants, or ascendants
b) The error frustrates the real purpose of the parties d) It must have been the reason why the contract was entered into
e) The threat must be of an unjust act, an actionable wrong
ILLUSTRATION B
Apa and Tim entered into a contract, which they intended should result in a co- Violence or intimidation shall annul the obligation, although it may have been employed
ownership between them, but which turned out later to be a mortgage, as a result of by a third person who did not take part in the contract. (Art. 1336)
their mutual error as to the legal effect of the agreement. Here, the contract is voidable.
ILLUSTRATION E
When one claims mistake, mistake presupposes absence of information, so a person Julian and OJ had a public spat, flaunting their mistresses. Julian tells OJ to sell the
can claim mistake only if he has no access to information or that the person could or latter’s Davao property otherwise Julian will expose OJ’s extra-marital affair. OJ agreed.
should have known the true facts. If a person is in a position to know the true statement Is this a vice of consent? No, because the expose is a public interest issue. But
of fact, by exercise of due diligence, there is an inexcusable mistake; you cannot claim technically, that’s blackmail with a justification. It’s not intimidation but a threat of an
mistake as a vice of consent. expose from an offense. It’s not a vice of consent nor is it libel because you’re exposing
a public official. The threat here is not unlawful, but it may amount to blackmail under
ILLUSTRATION C the RPC.
George wants to buy a car. Model 2016. He had a mistake in a certain accessory of a
car. He thought the seats were Licaros seats but it was factory manufactured. This is If it amounts to blackmail, it may be a vice of consent, but that’s more of a criminal law
not a mistake vitiating consent because it is just an accessory – it is just peripheral, not issue. The law requires that the threat be unlawful.
the main consideration. When the contract specified that the seat should be of this
brand – it will be a breach, not a mistake vitiating consent. If Julian brings the paramour to Davao lot in the midst of a banana plantation; if he says
something bad will happen to her until OJ signs the contract, that’s clearly unlawful.
ILLUSTRATION D
George bought a car to use it for a race. He bought a Toyota. He thought the car can There is no intimidation if:
compete with a Posrche. There was a failed estimation and the motive was not 1. A party is merely exercising a lawful claim or a right
disclosed. This is not mistake vitiating consent, unless the motive is disclosed to the 2. The party is not capable of inflicting the injury threatened
other party and made the contract. 3. There may be a time when there is intimidation but it is not the cause of the
party. In that case, it is not a vice of consent. Intimidation is a vice of consent
DIFFERENT ERRORS:
 if it is the cause or the reason why the party entered into the contract. You party made a fraudulent representation without the involvement of
have to show the causation of the consent of the party. either party, and a party was misled. This could be a basis of mistake
2. It must be serious (must be the cause of getting the consent)
UNDUE INFLUENCE 3. It must result in damage or injury to the aggrieved party
When a person takes improper advantage of his power over the will of another, deprive
him/her of a reasonable freedom of choice. This involves moral coercion, which may ILLUSTRATION F
be just or lawful. Giannis has a car. He sells it to Khris. Giannis told Khris that that the car runs so fast,
it can hover. He brought the car, he tried, it didn’t hover and so he said: “This is a
REQUISITES FOR UNDUE INFLUENCE TO VITIATE CONSENT misrepresentation”.
a) Improper advantage
b) Power over the will of another This won’t likely amount to fraud because it could have been done as part of sales talk.
c) Deprivation of the latter’s will of a reasonable freedom of choice
ILLUSTRATION G
EXAMPLES OF CIRCUMSTANCES TO BE CONSIDERED Jack is selling a guitar to River and the representation is that this guitar was used by
a) Confidential, family, spiritual, and other relations between the parties Paul McCartney. It turned out it was used by Jack only, but based on that information,
b) Mental weakness River purchased the guitar. This is an example of causal fraud. It is the inducement of
c) Ignorance Jack using a made up fact, that caused River to purchase the guitar.
d) Financial distress
ILLUSTRATION H
NOTE: Undue influence exercised by a third party vitiates consent, just like in the case Jack sold to River a stone which Jack represents as a diamond of a certain carat (3
of violence and intimidation. carats). River is a jeweler. River cannot claim fraud because he’s in the business.

In the case of DBP, a borrower had a restructuring agreement with DBP. The borrower
could not pay the loan so he entered into a restructuring agreement with DBP, and the
claim was there was undue influence, based on financial distress. The borrower was
not in the position to pay, and so was forced to enter into that contract.
The Court said that financial distress is not undue influence; otherwise there would be
no restructuring agreement. There is only such when the party cannot pay the loan.
FRAUD
Under the law, fraud refers to all kinds of deception. It includes insidious machinations
by one party leading another party to error.
He ought to know since he’s a jeweler. So no amount of misrepresentation by Jack will
amount to fraud considering the capacity to get the correct information.
It must be causal fraud for the contract to be rendered voidable, and for the fraud to be
a vice of consent.
ILLUSTRATION I
Jack says “I think this guitar will at least fetch Php100,000”. It’s an opinion of one part
to another. It won’t amount to fraud unless he is an expert and relies on his expertise.
32(1) Yason v. Arciaga

The deceit must be serious. The deceit is the cause for a party consenting to the 32(2) Dela Cruz v. Sison
contract.
32(3) Paragas v. Heirs of Balacano
TWO KINDS OF FRAUD
1. INCIDENTAL FRAUD: fraud that is not the reason for a party to enter into a 32(4) DBP v. CA
contract. This happens after consent. It can be a fraud in performance.
2. CAUSAL FRAUD: determines or causes the consent. It exists prior to, or
simultaneous with, the consent.

It must be causal fraud for the contract to be rendered voidable, and for the fraud to be
a vice of consent.

REQUIREMENTS FOR FRAUD TO VITIATE CONSENT:

1. It must be employed by a contracting party, or someone acting in connivance
with ,or to concert with, the contracting party.
 If it is done by a third party, it cannot be fraud vitiating consent.
However, it may result in a cake of mistake. For example, a third